That's good news. Thanks for pointing it out, it still isn't top of my list when I google; nor on the first page, the second, the third, the fourth, the fifth ... possibly because it only came out 48 minutes ago.

I note that unless the story is missing some details, he still hasn't been charged by the police (something which is not necessary to empanel a grand jury).

Suppose the courts decided that lynching was OK. Would it still be murder to kill a black man? Not in law, but in fact and in conscience would it be murder for a bunch of Klansmen to take a man who had committed no crime but being the wrong color in the wrong place at the wrong time, douse him in gasoline, and burn him alive?

Good grief, by your criteria we couldn't say that Cain murdered Abel, since there were no courts to say that he did. Hitler didn't murder any Jews, since he escaped Nuremberg. Fred West didn't murder anyone, since despite his confession and all the bones in his back yard, he killed himself before trial. No-one whosoever murdered Nicole Simpson. It's not just that OJ didn't murder her --- despite all the stab wounds and the fact that she was dead, no-one murdered her because no-one has been convicted.

On the face of the statute, the following appears to allow shootings by a person engaged in lawful activity, such as following an innocent person in such a way as to make that person fearful or angry enough to defend himself. It would not seem to matter whether the threatened person reasonably feared for his safety as long as he was wrong about the shooter's initial intentions.

quote:(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

We have laws that say that you can murder people scot-free so long (a) they are in your vicinity (b) you subsequently say that you felt threatened or that you suspected that they were going to commit a crime. And that's it. All you need do is testify, truly or falsely, about your own mental state, and so long as you say you felt this or you thought that, you walk.

I haven't read the follow up remarks so maybe this has already been covered. But I wanted to make this point before the thread went into summation.

You are wrong. This is not all that is required for a legitimate self defense claim. You must also show that your belief that you were being threatened was objectively reasonable. Otherwise, it would be simplicity itself to avoid any murder charge. Since we know that people are convicted of murder every day, obviously it's not that easy to beat.

Although I haven't looked in depth at the Martin case, the question is going to come down to whether what Zimmerman knew at the time was enough to justify a reasonable belief that his life was in danger. I don't know what he claims to have known, so I can't evaluate the merits. But it's quite impossible to accurately evaluate any claim unless you begin with the correct standard. The standard you describe is simply not accurate.

{AbE}

Having read the rest of the comments, I note that Catholic Scientist provided what is apparently the actual text of the law. You will note that it talks about "reasonable fear." Simply stating you were afraid is not enough if your fear is not reasonable. In the law, when the word "reasonable" is used, overwhelmingly what is meant is objectively using a reasonable person standard.

Zimmerman could testify on a stack of bibles that he was afraid. But if the objective facts that he describes are not sufficient to provide a reasonable basis for that fear, a jury could very easily believe that he was actually afraid but still convict him.

Edited by subbie, : As noted

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson

We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat

It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate

Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

quote:(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Although the above quoted doesn't seem to cover what seems to be the "vaguely threatened" situation I understand the Trayvon Martin case to be.

Reading elsewhere on the internet, my impression was that the shooter was stalking the victim more than the victim being any sort of threat to the shooter. Will re-research this further.

Professor, geology, Whatsamatta UEvolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.

"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." - John Kenneth Galbraith

"Yesterday on Fox News, commentator Glenn Beck said that he believes President Obama is a racist. To be fair, every time you watch Glenn Beck, it does get a little easier to hate white people." - Conan O'Brien

"I know a little about a lot of things, and a lot about a few things, but I'm highly ignorant about everything." - Moose

Although the above quoted doesn't seem to cover what seems to be the "vaguely threatened" situation I understand the Trayvon Martin case to be.

But legally following someone might reasonably create a situation where said followee objects and challenges you. You might reasonably and accurately, perceive a substantial chance of getting your butt totally kicked in such a situation. The law appears to allow shooting in this situation rather than backing off.

And as Dr. Adequate points out, if the teenager was legally armed, he would certainly have been justified in plugging Zimmerman. Is this really the way any sane person wants his neighborhood to work?

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison

I read the Mother Jones article and all ther comments there (took hours) and it does seem as if this child was hunted down and shot dead for the simple reason of "walking whilst black".

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Under that definition, Trayvon would have been perfectly entitled to stand his ground, not the idiot who was chasing him. The "stand your ground" defence isn't going to apply to Zimmerman give that he was pursuing Trayvon and, according to Zimmerman's own words, preserved on the 911 recording, Trayvon was running away.

You have a minor being tailed by a stranger in an SUV. If it was my kid, I'd want him to run home, get outta there. Right from the start, the only person with reason to be scared was Trayvon. I hope they throw the book at Zimmerman. It's horrifying that he hasn't even been arrested.

Edited by Trixie, : The thread must have gone into summation mode while I was writing this post cos I only got the wee message when I hit the "Submit" button.